The Dangers of Intermingling Art and Politics

Margaret O’ Malley

Art is an immensely powerful medium that has the potential to convey raw human emotion, depict heroic deeds, and inspire and uplift those who experience it. From music to painting, art in its many forms and variations, has delighted, stimulated, and moved individuals for ages uncounted. Visual art, in particular possesses the ability to convey a more direct image, story, or idea. Harnessing this facility to communicate with audiences in an impactful way, visual artists may express their own personal opinions, ideals, and beliefs through their artwork. In recent years, Chinese artist Ai Weiwei has used brazen and sometimes offensive artwork as a means to protest the tyrannical and oppressive communist government in China. In contrast to Ai Weiwei’s blatant political artwork, Impressionist artist Mary Cassatt subtly promoted women’s empowerment through beautiful and attractive paintings. Thus, art may indeed be used as a vehicle to express political ideas. However, when using art to convey political opinions, artists must be extremely cautious lest the force of their political messages overwhelm and destroy the integrity of the art itself. Both Ai Weiwei and Mary Cassatt employ artwork to convey political ideas, however, Weiwei does so to the destruction of the art, while Cassatt’s paintings stand as incredible works of art, regardless of their political implications. 

Expressing controversial political messages through artwork may indeed create an impact in society, however, it is important to consider how artwork, and the audience’s perception of it, is changed, if not materially damaged, by using art in this way. In this turbulent world, conflicting beliefs and ideologies clash unceasingly. Amidst today’s political climate, it seems almost impossible to find moments of harmony and peace amidst the clamor of political strife that is so cruelly and harshly dividing much of society. Art, indeed, ought to be lifted from the mire of politics and serve as a hallowed ground where all may tread in peace. In its purest form, art should be interpretive, encompassing, and, at its heart, inspiring. As eloquently stated by Oscar Wilde, “The artist is the creator of beautiful things. To reveal art and conceal the artist is art’s aim” (Wilde, n.p.). Therefore, the artist’s personal beliefs should not be glaringly obvious to the viewer. When a group of people regard a painting, each individual should be able to divine their own unique interpretations from it. According to Wilde, “It is the spectator, and not life, that art really mirrors” (Wilde, n.p). Thus, there should be no restrictions applied to onlookers, and certainly no clear-cut and controversial message loudly defending a political ideology and brazenly telling the audience how they ought to think and feel. When viewed in this light, a work of art ceases to have much, if any, artistic value when its only purpose is to convey a divisive political message. If the only appeal in a work of art is its political allusions, it cannot be considered as true artwork. Indeed, such “art” is really only political propaganda thinly veiled under the sophisticated guise of art. Yet, if artists feel utterly compelled to use art as a political statement, it must be done with subtlety, and should never detract from the integrity of the artwork. Indeed, it is important for artists to consider the possible repercussions of using art to convey a controversial political message. Such a depiction will, undoubtedly, immediately offend and repulse a majority of onlookers, who will then dismiss the political message as too outrageous for further consideration. Thus, blatant political messaging through art will, in the end, fail to create the considerable impact that a more subtle and palatable work of art might have elicited. Indeed, art ought to be kept unsullied from politics, however, if artists feel called to employ art to further political motivations, the integrity of the art itself must be regarded as the first importance.

Ai Weiwei’s political artwork most certainly does not possess great artistic value when stripped of its political implications. Indeed, it is to be wondered whether his artwork would garner any interest at all were it not for his outspoken political activism, which has won him international fame. A native of China, Ai Weiwei was born in 1957 and grew up amidst the strife of the “first Anti-Rightist Campaign,” which involved the “reeducation” of “intellectuals” through forced “manual labor” (Ambrose, pg. xvii-xviii). As Ai Weiwei’s father, Ai Qing, was both a “poet and intellectual,” the “entire [Weiwei] family…was ‘sent down’ to the hinterlands for labor and reeducation,” where they were inflicted with persecution and brutality (Ambrose, pg. xvii-xviii). Outraged by the oppression and abuse that the people of China suffer under, Ai Weiwei chooses to use art as a means to rebel against the tyrannical Chinese government. Many of his works are provocative, convey unmistakable meaning, and may appear off-putting, and even appalling, to certain audiences. Yet, this is through Weiwei’s own design, for, as he brazenly claims, “Artists are not beauticians. They are not obliged to provide services to anyone, they do not need to create pleasing scenery” (Ambrose, pg. 8). Thus, Weiwei subscribes to the 20th century movement of “conceptual art,” which is, essentially, “art for which the idea (or concept) behind the work is more important than the finished art object” (Tate). Therefore, Weiwei’s foremost concern is not to create beautiful artwork but rather, to convey direct ideas or messages. One “of his most iconic images,” “Coca-Cola urn,” is an extremely controversial piece (Ambrose, pg. xx). In order to protest the destruction that the communist government is wreaking upon Chinese culture, Ai Weiwei took an ancient Neolithic vase and unflinchingly painted the American logo “Coca-Cola” on its side in red paint. As seen below, the vase itself is a beautifully preserved piece of ancient history. However, its value is now destroyed by the Coca-Cola logo, which completely mars the vase’s historical significance. Ironically, Ai Weiwei’s intent in defacing this vase is to convey his passion for preserving ancient Chinese culture. By inciting the public’s horror at seeing a piece of Chinese history openly ruined, he hopes to drive home the fact that the Chinese government is, in fact, demolishing Chinese culture and history every day. However, even if Ai Weiwei’s motives are admirable and further the preservation of Chinese culture, the reality remains that, in order to prove a point, he chose to desecrate a priceless piece of history. Thus, Ai Weiwei’s “Coca-Cola Vase” is an example of the blatant and offensive political art that possesses no intrinsic artistic value and will, doubtless, offend and horrify a substantial portion of viewers.

Another of Ai Weiwei’s political pieces is the “He Xei (River Crab),” which is, as pictured below, simply a large mass of crabs clumped in a disordered heap around the base of a pillar. Again, this artwork is created as a gesture of rebellion against the Chinese government. In 2009, the government launched an “Internet clean-up campaign,” which “targeted” “pornographic sites…online discussion groups, blogs, BBS boards and other sites related to politics”  (Ambrose, pg. 279). Due to this campaign, the name of the river crab is frowned upon by the Chinese government, because its name, he xie, “is a…pun on ‘harmonization,’ a euphemistic term for official censoring or deletion of undesirable content from the Internet” (Ambrose, pg. 279). In short, Ai Weiwei chose to construct this artwork in order to mock the Chinese government and display his anger at the stringent infringements that it forces upon personal liberty. However, once the “He Xie (River Crab)” is sundered from its political context it becomes wholly meaningless—no more than a tasteless and rather repulsive jumble of crabs—and it most certainly does not provide any sort of deeply intellectual or aesthetically pleasing appeal.

Indeed, Ai Weiwei seems to be primarily a political activist, and an artist only secondarily. In order to further his political motives, he takes the vast power of art into his hands and manipulates and bastardizes it, defiling the meaning of “artwork” by attaching it to his creations. Thus, Ai Weiwei’s political “art” holds no value outside the realm of politics and is no more than a vehicle for political activism.

In contrast to Ai Weiwei, Mary Cassatt brilliantly succeeds in intertwining politics with art, never letting political implications cloud or destroy the artistic value of her paintings. Born in America in 1844, Mary Cassatt was an Impressionist painter who spent much of her professional life abroad (Mathews, pg. 7). Her paintings won renown in Paris, where she exhibited alongside such artists as Monet, Pissarro, and Degas (Mathews, pg. 135). Critics have described her art as “exquisite [symphonies] of color” that possess “bold, mysterious, and fresh” qualities (Mathews, pg. 137). In addition to her progressive style of painting, however, Cassatt also held untraditional views regarding women’s role in society. She claimed that “women should be someone not something” (Yeh, pg. 363). Much of Cassatt’s art provides glimpses into the everyday duties and pastimes of the women living in her era. Thus, “by recreating her subjects’ actions in the world, [Cassatt’s] imagery challenges stereotypic views of women which disembody them” (Yeh, pg. 363). Contrary to the standard expectations of her time, “Cassatt had never married, and lived what we might today regard as an alternate lifestyle for a woman of her period” (Broude, pg. 36). Despite her gender, however, Cassatt fearlessly pursued her career as a painter, ranking among the finest artists of the Impressionist period and garnering considerable acclaim during her lifetime. Many of her most famous subjects celebrate the pure bond between a mother and child. Tender caresses, sweet upturned faces, and intimate maternal moments are all gently, yet honestly, depicted by Cassatt’s brush. However, in addition to her sensitive portrayals of women in the role of motherhood, Cassatt also depicted women in less traditional attitudes, which furthered the once controversial notion that women could be considered on an equal intellectual plane with men. Thus, “Cassatt did occasionally use her art to challenge or at least to wryly expose an aspect of the period’s gendered social relations” (Broude, pg. 37). In order to “[make] a particular kind of claim for the educated woman,” Cassatt “chose to paint pictures of her sister Lydia…and her mother…. both utterly absorbed in reading the daily newspaper” (Broude, pg. 37). Thus, by depicting women casually enjoying pastimes that were once deemed “male,” Cassatt is delicately promoting her belief in equal rights (Broude, pg. 37).

In addition, Cassatt painted a picture titled, “Woman and Child Driving,” the subject of which can be interpreted to convey a sense of women’s empowerment. As pictured below, the painting depicts a woman, with a little girl at her side, driving a carriage through a park, “while the displaced footman sits passively behind” (Broude, pg. 42). The fact that the woman is placed in the rather unusual position of the driver’s seat, while the man sits in the rear, may indeed be interpreted as “a veiled challenge to…. the normal social order” of that era (Broude, pg. 42). However, Cassatt expressed this controversial message in such a “normalized” and delicately subtle way that is it highly unlikely that the viewers of Cassatt’s time were overtly offended or shocked (Broude, pg. 42).

Therefore, these artworks by Cassatt are examples of how an artist, if deft and skillful enough, may indeed convey a restrained, but no less thoughtful, political message through art. A painting such as “Woman and Child Driving,” plants a seed in the mind of observers by gently inviting the onlooker to consider the female’s role in society. This counters Ai Weiwei’s “Coca-Cola Vase,” which is far more likely to provoke instantaneous horror than any sort of inspiration. Therefore, Cassatt’s exquisite and meaningful paintings stand in contrast to conceptual art, such as Weiwei’s, which conveys a message, but does not provide any aesthetic appeal. Indeed, art that can convey a message while still displaying beauty will undoubtably influence more viewers, as the attractiveness of the artwork will invite onlookers to contemplate its inherent meaning. Thus, Cassatt’s magnificent Impressionist paintings stand as a testimony to how art and politics may be combined without repelling audiences or destroying the significance of the art itself.

In these turbulent and chaotic times, it is important to consider exactly what role an artist should play in society. With so few areas of middle ground, it seems well-nigh impossible to create a space where the arms of prejudice and hostility are abandoned at the door. Yet, art can indeed create such a space of tranquility. Christian and Atheist alike are moved by the life-like depiction of grief and desolation in Michelangelo’s Pieta. And, sitting side by side in a concert hall, both liberal and conservative individuals may be engulfed in the sonorous splendor of Tchaikovsky’s Fifth Symphony. If all art was inextricably linked to politics, it would surely be impossible for such experiences as these to occur. By bridging the yawning chasm of politics and personal beliefs, the arts provide an irreplaceable means for dissimilar individuals to discover ways to relate with one another. Thus, the duty of the artist is to provide the public with art that is kept as unsullied by political motives as possible, providing people with a haven of respite from the grim realities of everyday life. For indeed, if individuals focused more on means to connect with one another, and less on ways to tear each other down, this world would be a much more tranquil and wholesome place.

Works Cited

Ambrose, Lee. AI Weiwei’s Blog: Writings, Interviews, and Digital Rants, 2006-2009.     Massachusetts Institute of Technology, 2011. 

Broude, Norma. “Mary Cassatt: Modern Woman or the Cult of True Womanhood?”  Woman’s   Art Journal, Vol. 21, No. 2, 2001, pp. 36-43.

Mathews, Nancy Mowll. Mary Cassatt: A Life. Yale University Press, 1998.

Tate. “Conceptual Art” https://www.tate.org.uk/art/art-terms/c/conceptual-art Accessed on October 14, 2020.

Wilde, Oscar. The Picture of Dorian Gray. The Project Gutenberg E-book. https://www.gutenberg.org/files/174/174-h/174-h.htm.

Yeh, Susan Fillin. “Mary Cassatt’s Images of Women.”  Art Journal, Vol. 35, No. 4, 1976, pp.   359-363.

Works Referenced 

Ai Weiwei: Never Sorry. Klayman, Alison. Sundance Selects, 2012.  

Artworks Mentioned

Ai Weiwei. Coca-Cola Vase. 1994. Artstor, https://0-library-artstor-org.libraryguest.juilliard.edu/#/asset/LARRY_QUALLS_10313740807

Ai Weiwei. He Xie (River Crab). 2012, Image: 2012. Artstor, https://0-library-artstor-org.libraryguest.juilliard.edu/#/asset/AWSS35953_35953_35436193

Mary Cassatt (American painter, 1844-1926). Lydia Cassatt Reading. 1878. Artstor, https://0-library-artstor-org.library.juilliard.edu/#/asset/AMCADIG_10313213846

Cassatt, Mary, 1844-1926. Reading 'Le Figaro'.. 1883. Artstor, https://0-library-artstor-org.library.juilliard.edu/#/asset/ARTSTOR_103_41822000271161

Cassatt, Mary, 1844-1926. Woman and Child Driving. 1879. Artstor, https://0-library-artstor-org.library.juilliard.edu/#/asset/ARTSTOR_103_41822000199206

Copyright © 2021 Margaret O’ Malley